► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘anti-dhimmitude’

Liberal newspaper “The Tennessean” weighs in on Geert Wilders

by 1389AD ( 8 Comments › )
Filed under Free Speech, Islam, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Supremacism, Islamic Terrorism, Special Report at May 17th, 2011 - 4:30 pm

Gates of Vienna: The Tennessean Weighs In

Reprinted with permission.

Protesting Geert Wilders in Franklin, TN
I brought home a print copy of yesterday’s Tennessean, and the article below was on the first page of the B section (“Local & Business”).

The online version is identical, except for a factual error in the print copy about the leadership of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition, which the paper corrected after having it brought to their attention.

All four stories on the same front page of B section are quite politically correct. Besides the article on Geert, we see:

  • One about the retracing of the civil rights “Freedom Rides” on their fiftieth anniversary;
  • A report which takes a disapproving tone about the attempt to reverse an anti-white set-aside law — ironically referred to as an “anti-bias law”; and
  • An article about a judge who will retain his membership in a country club, even though “some judges say the club discriminates against women and African-Americans.”

So this gives you an idea of what kind of rag The Tennessean is. It is, after all, a Gannett paper, and Gannett seems to impose this sort of squishy vanilla liberalism on its local franchises all over the country.

The reporter had a hard time catching Geert out, however. Mr. Wilders has fined-tuned his message in the face of a far more hostile and more leftist European press, so that he is as bullet-proof against PC as it is possible to be while still remaining anti-Islam.

Below is the paper’s take on Nashville’s encounter with the Great Islamophobe. I’ll only include a few of my own comments, since I’ll have more to say in later posts about Geert’s visit to Tennessee:

Dutch politician brings anti-Islam views to TN
by Jennifer Brooks

Dutch politician Geert Wilders sees a kindred spirit in Tennessee — a state where new mosques draw protests and the legislature is considering a bill that once targeted adherents of Islamic law.

Geert Wilders in Franklin, TNOn trial for hate speech in his home country, Wilders brought his headline-grabbing views on Islam to Middle Tennessee on Thursday. He came to town as the invited guest of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition, a 2-week-old political coalition founded by Republican former congressional candidate Lou Ann Zelenik.

“I come with a warning for America,” said Wilders, a filmmaker and member of the Dutch parliament, and something of a cult celebrity in some conservative circles. [emphasis added]

Inserting the word “cult” before “celebrity” tips the reporter’s hand. No liberal-progressive celebrity would earn such a modifier. This is intended to tag those who are interested in Mr. Wilders’ message as right-wing kooks.

The article continues:

Close Islamic schools, he warned America. Halt construction of mosques — or “hate palaces,” as he calls them. Cut off immigration from “non-Western and especially Islamic countries,” and expel any immigrants who do not “assimilate.”

“I was happy to visit the state of Tennessee, where I know a lot of people — certainly a lot of Christians — feel the same threat as we do, and know when you talk about values, when you talk about who you are and who you are not, and that Christianity is for certain not the same as Islam,” said Wilders, who is not himself a Christian. “I compare Islam not with Christianity and Judaism. I compare Islam with fascism and communism.”

His first stop of the day was talk show host Steve Gill’s radio show, then a meet-and-greet and news conference at Williamson County Republican Party headquarters in Franklin. The evening ended with a closed-to-the-press speech at Cornerstone Church in Madison about what Wilders sees as the evils of the world’s second-largest religion.

And now for the protesters. Unlike, say, the BBC, The Tennessean is honest about how many there were — about ten or twelve. These were not anarchists or culture-enrichers, but ordinary Tennesseans of the secular liberal faith. I had a nice chat with some of them; I’ll report more on that later.

The important thing to notice about the events in Franklin and Nashville is that there were at most twenty or so demonstrators, whereas several thousand sympathetic listeners turned out to hear what Mr. Wilders had to say. The evening at the Cornerstone Church was unprecedented in my experience, and should be the model for future efforts.

Protesters turn out

In Franklin, about a dozen protesters stood in the punishing May sunshine across from Republican headquarters, waving signs that said “SHAME” and “Be nice or go away.”

Great motto, that — “Be nice or go away.” Does it ever apply to Anjem Choudary?

“It’s very inappropriate for an official political party here in Tennessee to bring in someone so notorious,” said Williamson County Democratic Party Chairman Peter Burr. “This guy is sort of the epitome of the outside agitator. That’s not the way we do business here in Tennessee.”

During the evening’s program, Bill Warner agreed with The Tennessean, and insisted that “outside agitators” should be sent home — which would then make his job unnecessary.

Across the street, about two dozen visitors milled outside Republican Party headquarters, eating lunch or filing inside to shake hands with Wilders. He traveled with a contingent of local and Dutch security, wary of the large number of death threats he has drawn over the years.

Despite the controversy, or perhaps because of it, his visit was a headline-grabbing coup for the fledgling Tennessee Freedom Coalition.

“Not bad for our first event,” said Jeff Hartline, the coalition’s director. Wilders’ visit was not an official fundraiser for the coalition or the GOP, although Hartline said he expected to see a spike in donations as a result.

Wilders’ visit comes as the Tennessee legislature moves toward a vote on what was once known as the anti-Shariah law bill. After a storm of protests, lawmakers stripped any reference to Shariah — the religious law of Islam — from the bill. Instead, it now grants the Tennessee governor and the state attorney general the power to declare organizations to be terrorist groups.

It is expected to pass overwhelmingly.

Wilders, meanwhile, squeezed in his Tennessee visit between a speaking tour of Canada and his return home to the Netherlands.

“We have nothing against Muslims, as such,” he said in parting. “We have nothing against people of any kind of origin. We have a problem with the Islamic ideology.”

I never saw any CAIR protesters at either event, although I heard there were a few out by the road in front of the Cornerstone Church, and at least one Muslima attended the speech wearing full hijab. However, CAIR was dutifully consulted by the newspaper for the occasion:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a statement condemning Wilders’ visit to Tennessee and asking state and local Republican officials to repudiate the decision to “honor one of the world’s leading Islam-haters.”

It will be interesting to see how many Tennessee Republicans run and hide under the bed after being called out by CAIR. Based on the handful I met, they are not lily-livered lickspittle cowards like most of their brethren at the national level in Washington D.C.

But we shall see.

Geert Wilders in Ottawa

by 1389AD ( 4 Comments › )
Filed under Canada, Headlines, immigration, Islam, Islamic Invasion, Islamic Supremacism at May 16th, 2011 - 8:27 pm

Gates of Vienna: An Interview With Geert Wilders

Reprinted with permission.

“I’m Dutch. I am not a European.”

While he was in Ottawa last week, Geert Wilders was interviewed by James Cohen for the Free Thinking Film Society and IFPS-Canada. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video [click to view].

Gates of Vienna: Geert Wilders’ Speech in Ottawa

Reprinted with permission.
As part of his North American tour, Geert Wilders gave a speech in Ottawa on May 10th. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video [click to view].


March of the Pigs? Awaiting Updates…

by 1389AD ( 72 Comments › )
Filed under Food and Drink, France, Free Speech, Humor, Open thread, Sharia (Islamic Law) at May 15th, 2011 - 4:00 pm

Small pink pig

I am still awaiting updates on the counterjihad “March of the Pigs” that had been planned for Lyon, France on May 14, 2011.

Here is what I found on the Marche des cochons website:

Rassemblement pour la liberté autorisé, une victoire pour les Identitaires!

Après 48 heures de réflexion, la préfecture du Rhône vient d’autoriser la manifestation identitaire « rassemblement pour la liberté » de samedi prochain 14 mai. Cette autorisation vient d’être notifiée suite à une rencontre en Préfecture entre les services de l’Etat et les organisateurs.

Il s’agit d’une véritable victoire politique. Après son ubuesque interdiction de la « Marche des cochons » de la semaine dernière, l’Etat a donc reculé. Il est vrai qu’il lui était difficile d’interdire un rassemblement pacifique pour la défense de la liberté d’expression. Ce d’autant plus qu’il n’a pas une seconde envisagé d’interdire la contre-manifestation des nervis d’extrême-gauche qui, depuis des semaines, appellent à la violence physique sur leurs sites internet à l’encontre des militants identitaires ou patriotes. Une contre-manifestation qui sera sous surveillance policière à environ 4 kms du rassemblement identitaire.

Le Bloc Identitaire se félicite de cette décision, conforme à la démocratie et aux droits des gens. Il remercie l’ensemble de ses opposants et notamment les élus socialistes et Verts de la municipalité lyonnaise qui, depuis quinze jours, par leur battage médiatique hostile, ont servi d’attaché de presse, ô combien efficaces, du mouvement identitaire. Toute peine méritant salaire, le Bloc Identitaire leur adressera prochainement, à titre amical, le programme de leur candidat à l’élection présidentielle, Arnaud Gouillon. Ils découvriront sans doute alors avec surprise, loin des clichés et des caricatures, les propositions du Bloc identitaire en matière d’environnement, de rapports nord-sud ou de construction européenne.

Après cette première victoire, le Bloc Identitaire et Rebeyne! appellent tous les Lyonnais et habitants de la région, à transformer l’essai et à venir participer à ce Rassemblement pour la Liberté, samedi à 14 h 30, place St-Jean à Lyon.

Face à toutes les menaces, à tous les abandons, l’espoir doit renaitre : Lyon sera toujours la capitale de la résistance!

Translated into English via Google:

Freedom rally authorized a victory for Identitaires!

After 48 hours of reflection, the prefecture of the Rhone has cleared the event identity “freedom rally” next Saturday May 14 This authority has been notified following a meeting in the Prefecture between state departments and organizers.

This is a real political victory. After his grotesque prohibition of “March of Pigs” last week, the state has declined. It is true that it was difficult to ban a peaceful rally for freedom of expression. Especially since he has not considered one second-demonstration against the banning of left-wing thugs who, for weeks, calling for physical violence on their websites against activists identity or patriots. An event-cons who will be under police surveillance at about 4 kms from the gathering of identity.

Block Identity welcomes this decision, consistent with democracy and human rights of people. He thanked all his opponents including the Socialists and Greens elected to the City of Lyon, who last fortnight, by their hostile media coverage, served as press secretary, oh so effective, the identity movement. Any punishment worthy salary, Identity Bloc send them soon, as friendly, the program of their presidential candidate, Arnaud Gouin. They then discover perhaps surprisingly, far from the stereotypes and caricatures, the proposals of the identity block in the environment, North-South relations or European integration.

After this first victory, the Bloc and Identity Rebeyne! Lyonnais and call all people of the region, transforming the test and come participate in this Rally for Freedom, 14 am Saturday at 30, Place St-Jean in Lyon.

Address all threats, all withdrawals must hope reborn: Lyon will always be the capital of the resistance!

It appears as though the rally was scheduled to go ahead after all. I was unable to find any videos or news coverage of the rally itself. If you are aware of any, please contact me at 1389 Blog.

In any event, I have chosen to honor at least the efforts, and hopefully also the success, of these counterjihad marchers with a decidedly non-halal culinary effort of my own:

Fatwa-Worthy Pasta Sauce (4 Servings)

1 lb. hot Italian pork sausage (remove sausage casings, or buy sausage meat without casings, it is best to buy sausage in natural casing, many producers use casings from www.dcwcasing.com/, so that should not be a problem)
1 medium-sized onion, chopped
4 cloves garlic, chopped
Olive oil (or sunflower oil)
1 carton fresh mushrooms (or 1 can sliced mushrooms)
28 oz. (or more) tomato puree
8 oz. dry red wine
1 bay leaf
1/4 tsp. fennel
1/2 tsp. crushed red pepper
1/4 tsp. black pepper
1 tsp. parsley
1 tsp. chopped chives
1 tsp. oregano
1 tsp. basil
1 bay leaf

Brown the onions, garlic, sausage, fennel, and red pepper flakes in a frying pan with the oil. If you are using fresh mushrooms, slice them and add them to the sausage mixture. Do not overcook the sausage.

Put the sausage mixture and all remaining ingredients into a large saucepan and mix well. Bring to a boil, then simmer for 30 minutes, stirring occasionally. Discard bay leaf before serving.

This sauce can be used with just about any type of pasta, including lasagna.

The sauce requires no added salt, because the sausage meat contains enough salt to flavor the entire dish. The dry red wine adds just the right degree of tartness, without any need for vinegar or sugar.

 

The Retrial and Persecution of Counterjihadist Lars Hedegaard

by 1389AD ( 17 Comments › )
Filed under Censorship, Free Speech, Islamic Supremacism, Political Correctness at May 3rd, 2011 - 7:00 pm

Gates of Vienna: A Danish Show Trial, Yet Again

Reprinted with permission.

As regular readers know, the Danish journalist and historian Lars Hedegaard was acquitted of “hate speech” back in January. His crime had been to make remarks about the propensity of Muslim men for committing rape within their families — not all that remarkable an assertion in our circles, but a punishable offense in Modern Multicultural Denmark.

The district prosecutor has decided to have another go, and the second trial of Lars Hedegaard begins tomorrow in Copenhagen. Below is a piece written for the occasion by the editor of Sappho.dk.


The Danish Show Trial against Lars Hedegaard to Resume

By Katrine Winkel Holm, Chief Editor of Sappho.dk

Lars HedegaardOn April 26 my colleague, the Danish author and historian Lars Hedegaard, President of the Danish Free Press Society and The International Free Press Society, will be back in court accused of “racism” for comments he made during a conversation on the Islamic treatment of women.

Without his permission the entire conversation was electronically disseminated, which provided his detractors with the opportunity to denounce him to the police.

The district prosecutor for Copenhagen and Bornholm jumped at the chance to get this prominent free speech advocate convicted of “racism” under Denmark’s infamous “hate speech” article 266b of the penal code but suffered defeat when the case came before the lower court at Frederiksberg in January this year. The judge did not believe that Hedegaard’s comments had been made with the intent of public dissemination, which is what the prosecutor must prove in order to secure a conviction under article 266b.

Unhappy with this setback, the state prosecutor appealed to the Eastern Superior Court in Copenhagen, where the retrial is scheduled to start at 1 pm on April 26 before a panel of three judges.

The trial is expected to last no more than two hours, which would appear to leave little time to deal with the subject matter — the Islamic view on women and the treatment they have suffered throughout the ages.

However, truth has no place in cases brought under article 266b. All that matters is whether Hedegaard’s observations — or the observations he is claimed to have made — have caused Muslims to feel hurt. Consequently, the defendant is not allowed to present evidence or call witnesses who might confirm his contention that the Islamic treatment of women is incompatible with the norms of a civilised society.

Lars Hedegaard’s case is just one in a long line of similar heresy trials that have been conducted throughout Europe for decades. Among the most notorious are the prosecutions of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in Austria and Geert Wilders in Holland but there have been scores of similar cases that have received less public attention.

The reason for this judicial tsunami against outspoken Islam critics is not hard to find. It has become uncomfortably clear to ever-wider sections of the public that the official policies of free Muslim immigration, multiculturalism and cultural relativism have failed utterly. The European states are now faced with problems which their rulers have no idea how to solve. So instead of admitting that they have failed, they choose to silence those who point out that there are problems.

As Lars Hedegaard is prevented from talking about the real issue in court, he has used the time since his initial acquittal to write a book. Its title is Muhammad’s Girls: Violence, Murder and Rape in the House of Islam and it will be published the very day he is to appear in Superior Court.

Sappho has obtained permission from the publisher, The Free Speech Library, to translate and reprint Lars Hedegaard’s Foreword.

Foreword

On January 24, 2011 I had the experience — for the first time in my life — of sitting in the dock of a Danish courtroom. The State Prosecutor for Copenhagen and Bornholm had resolved that I had violated Article 266b of the penal code by publicly threatening, ridiculing and denigrating a group of people.

And a very large group of people at that. Somewhere between 1.2 and 1.6 billion Muslims — or at least the male half of them — who the State Prosecutor thought had reason to feel so aggrieved that I ought to be punished for it.

Global harmony was under pressure so the prosecutor had told the press that he had taken great pains in preparing the case.

His thorough preparations resulted in an indictment where the following words — which he attributed to me — were highlighted as criminal:

“When a Muslim man rapes a woman, it is his right to do so. When Swedish girls are raped, mass rape etc., etc., there is nothing wrong with it viewed from an Islamic perspective that is their right. They rape their own children. You hear that time and again. Girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins or their father. Women have no value, they are not human beings. Their function is to be wombs — they bear the warrior’s offspring and create new warriors but apart from that … well they may be used for sexual purposes but other than that they have no value.”

To which the State Prosecutor added: “and the like”.

As my attorney proved in court, these words were not mine but the State Prosecutor’s retelling of a much larger line of argument taken out of context.

On top of that the judge could find no evidence that my characterisation of the Islamic concept of women had been uttered with the intent of public dissemination — which is what Article 266b requires for something to be punishable. Consequently I was acquitted. At least initially as the prosecutor decided to appeal the verdict.

What remains it the prosecutor’s contention that all the words he had placed between his quotation marks were in fact denigrating and therefore punishable. So let us assume that I actually had spoken precisely as claimed by the prosecutor and done so publicly or had written it and disseminated it far and wide. Would I have been convicted? That is what many of those who have commented on the outcome of the trial believe, which is why they reject the contention that my acquittal may be seen as a victory for free speech.

For reasons I shall not dwell on in this context, I maintain that is was a victory, but I can well understand why others might view it differently.

I any event the case does pose a number of important questions: On what grounds does the State Prosecutor decide that somebody has a valid reason to feel hurt? Is it enough for somebody to call the police and claim to be offended on behalf of some group or other, whereupon the State Prosecutor presses charges? No, there are criteria, as the Director of Public Prosecutions, Joergen Steen Soerensen expressed in a letter from August 2010 to Sappho.dk’s Chief Editor, Katrine Winkel Holm:

“The core area of the provision [Article 266b] is statements to the effect that the group in question generally lacks value as human beings, liken them to animals in addition to gross and utterly non-factual [usaglige], generalised claims of serious criminality, negative personality traits and an immoral and offensive way of life.”

When one reads the Director of Public Prosecutions’ remark about “the group in question [that] generally lacks value as human beings”, it is easier to understand why he considers the words attributed to me in the indictment as offensive. He evidently believes that it is I who thinks that Islam’s “women have no value, they are not human beings” and that it is I who wants to deprive them of human value, place them on an equal footing with animals etc.

That would be a bold interpretation. I believe that women, as concerns rights, chances in life and claims to be respected, are or ought to be absolutely equal to men regardless of their religion or where in the world they were born.

So it is not my view on women that is reflected in the indictment but the view on women that I think can be derived from Islamic holy scripture, which has manifested itself throughout Islamic history and which is still being advocated by the most influential Islamic scholars.

It may also be that the Director of Public Prosecutions and the State Prosecutor for Copenhagen and Bornholm actually have understood that the indictment does not reflect my attitude towards Muslim women but Islam’s own. In that case, they must view this interpretation of Islam as “non-factual” and therefore criminal.

According to Nudansk Ordbog [Dictionary of Current Danish] “saglig” [factual] is something that is “primarily related to facts rather than feelings, intuition and personal judgement”. In that case it ought to be an easy task — but also absolutely necessary — for the prosecutor to disprove my interpretation of Islam’s canonical view on women. For the prosecutor to characterise my rendering as non-factual, he must be in possession of the right, factual and evidence-based interpretation.

As a responsible institution the public prosecutor therefore owes it to the citizens to explicate his state-authorised Islamic view on women and tell them what indisputable facts this state-guaranteed interpretation is based on. Otherwise the citizens run the risk of expressing themselves in a non-factual manner and be punished for it.

The first thing one must demand of a law is that it be clear so that everyone may understand what is permitted and what is forbidden. That much was stated in the preamble to the Law of Jutland from 1241. And now that the Director of Public Prosecutions has passed a law — albeit without the consent parliament — that non-factuality must be punished, it is incumbent on him to make this new law clear. In brief: He must unequivocally enlighten the citizens as to how one may talk about Islam. This book is intended as a help to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Most of the points of view below are not mine but opinions quoted from others. I start with the prophet Muhammad, whose view on women can hardly have failed to influence the behaviour of some Muslims.

It is far from certain that the public prosecutor will consider Muhammad’s and his followers’ interpretation of orthodox Islam factual, and under the new juridical regime it may not even be legal. But I urge him to accept that I mean well. Below he will find a compilation of everything that he evidently thinks Islam in not about. On this basis it will be easier for him to point to all the textual evidence, all the historical occurrences and all the statements that demonstrate that Islam is the religion of peace, tolerance and sexual equality.

Participate in the comments here.


Note: We will have a special Radio show on the killing of Bin Laden at 9:00 PM EST.